ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2026
Voiding Dysfunction After Prolapse Surgery: Uterosacral Ligament Suspension Versus Sacrospinous Ligament Suspension.
Article in International urogynecology journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introduction and hypothesisThis study compared the rate of postoperative urinary retention between women undergoing apical prolapse repair via uterosacral ligament suspension (USLS) versus sacrospinous ligament fixation (SSLF). We hypothesized that voiding dysfunction may be higher following SSLF.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective chart review study in a tertiary academic center from January 2015 through February 2025, including all patients undergoing either SSLF or USLS surgery. Voiding trials were generally performed the same day as the surgery. Specifically, the bladder was backfilled with 300 mL of sterile water or saline, the catheter was removed, and patients had to void ≥ 200 mL within 30 min to be discharged without a catheter. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed with a threshold of statistical significance set at p < 0.05 to examine the association between surgical approach and voiding trial outcome while controlling for relevant clinical and demographic factors.
resultsThe study included two patient groups (USLS 577; SSLF 186) who underwent surgery with mean ages of 63 and 67 years, respectively (p < 0.001). Race distribution differed between subgroups, with "White, non-Hispanic" being the most frequent category in both (84.1%; 71%; p = 0.003). Alcohol use (p = 0.015) and baseline pelvic organ prolapse stage also varied between the two surgical cohorts (USLS 50.1% stages I and II; SSLF: 61.8% stages III and IV; p = 0.006). Most patients in both groups experienced preoperative urinary incontinence (72.1%; 60.2%; p = 0.003) and underwent concomitant surgical procedures including mid-urethral slings (p < 0.001). In univariate analysis, there was no difference in voiding trial outcomes between both groups (p = 1). After controlling for confounders, the overall voiding trial outcomes did not differ in a statistically significant manner between the USLS and SSLF groups (OR 2.53, 95% CI 0.23-61.01, p = 0.48). This was also true even when slings were excluded (p = 0.3).
conclusionsThere was no observed difference in postoperative voiding dysfunction between the two surgical approaches. Future studies with larger sample sizes may garner different results.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41661302What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.